|
I must admit that being agnostic I feel a bit hypocritical on this issue. On one hand, I absolutely reject ID because its proponents are so noncomittal; we don't understand the science so it must be God. It's a wishy-washy position where they're afraid to admit they're really just Creationists ignoring science. In the same way, I refuse to say that there is or isn't a God, only that I'm withholding judgement until better evidence comes up. I'm not actively IGNORING current evidence, as I believe ID supporters do.
There's a big difference to me between waiting to make a decision based on better information and ignoring the information you already have in front of you.
__________________
"I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel
|